Re: ASA's "neutrality policy"

Though less sanguine than Ted about prospects for dialogue between TE & ID
(& some YEC), I'm in basic agreement with him here. & it's worth adding
that besides organizations advocating YEC or ID, there are also those which
are de facto TE organizations. While one doesn't have to accept TE & reject
the other views to be a member of CTNS, e.g., I think you'll find few IDers
& fewer YECs who belong to or support it. Note, e.g., Bob Russell's
editorial in the July 2005 issue of _Theology and Science_: "Intelligent
Design is Not Science and Does Not Qualify to be Taught in Public School
Science Classes." So it's not as if there were no organizations promoting
TE.

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ted Davis" <tdavis@messiah.edu>
To: <asa@calvin.edu>; <dickfischer@verizon.net>
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 9:29 AM
Subject: RE: ASA's "neutrality policy"

>>>> "Dick Fischer" <dickfischer@verizon.net> 12/15/05 7:02 PM >>>wrote,
> concerning Randy Isaac's view on the ASA's attitude toward members who
> advocate YEC:
>
> In your heart you know what's right, but lack the stomach to fight
> for it. Christ kicked the money changers out of the temple. That
> should be our example.
>
> Put it to a vote.
>
> Ted replies:
> You just did, Dick, you just did put it to a vote.
>
> Here is what I said as the final paragraph (in full) from my ballot for
> election to the ASA Council this year:
>
> A second challenge comes from growing tension within the larger body of
> Christ between advocates of "intelligent design" and advocates of what
> is commonly called "theistic evolution" (and I recognize that some ASA
> members and other people advocate views that might fit into both
> categories). Throughout its history the ASA has facilitated helpful,
> respectful exchanges of views on many aspects of the origins controversy,
> while not endorsing officially any one particular view. If elected, I
> would
> do what I can to help the ASA retain and enhance its role as an effective
> forum for the healthy exchange of views on all issues related to science
> and
> Christian faith, and to increase our visibility among the religious press.
>
> OK, I was talking about ID rather than YEC, but my overall attitude toward
> such controversy was clear here. We need to retain the historical role of
> the ASA as a forum for talking about (among many other things) various
> views
> on the origins controversy. Contrary to other organizations (such as the
> Creation Research Society or The Discovery Institute), the ASA has not
> officially held or defended a specific view on "evolution" (I put that
> word
> in scare quote b/c it means different things to different people). The
> CRS
> requires members to reject common descent and an old earth/universe and to
> accept the flood as the primary cause of the fossil record and many other
> aspects of the earth's surface. TDI expects its fellows to reject
> "evolution" in the "Darwinian" sense, where they define both of those
> terms,
> while staying away officially from the issues that the CRS focuses on.
> The
> ASA does neither of those things as a matter of policy. This leads lots
> of
> people to think we're just wimps who want to keep our cushy jobs and not
> make a fuss with the scientific establishment, but of course that's just
> so
> much name calling, in some cases I suspect by people who are intentionally
> trying to give insulting and distorted pictures to those who know a great
> deal less about science, theology, and the history of their interaction.
>
> This greatly limits our influence among those Christians who are focused
> on
> the "culture wars," in which those Christians who don't quite agree with
> either "side" are seen as cowards or traitors by some. In fact, it is a
> testimony both to our courage to stand for the pursuit of truth itself,
> independently of the politicization imposed on the debate by many others.
> It is also a tribute to our commitment to open inquiry, within the bounds
> of
> an agreed definition of Christian belief. We will survive the current
> "culture war" and continue to influence Christians in the sciences in the
> next century, if God wills it. People like Francis Collins (to cite him
> as
> one of many similar examples) will still need us to be there for them 100
> years from now, and if we remain true to our identity as an open forum
> within the bounds of an agreed statement of faith, we will still be there
> for them.
>
> As for YECs in the ASA, I have known several over the years, including
> some
> who attended local section meetings in the 1970s when I first learned
> about
> the ASA, at least one of whom is still a member. I wish myself that one
> of
> my younger YEC friends would join, b/c of the open attitude and genuine
> expertise (a doctorate in a highly relevant field from one of the top
> programs in the world) he brings to these issues. Undoubtdly we both
> agree
> that the ASA would not welcome most YECs, b/c most YECs engage in the kind
> of misrepresentation of the state of the scientific evidence that Randy
> mentioned. But not all do, and those who do not would IMO be very welcome
> here. B/c of our organizational history and b/c of the kinds of articles
> we
> have published since the 1960s and esp the 1970s, no one could fairly
> claim
> that we exist in order to promote YEC (this doesn't mean that for some
> political purpose an unfair or misinformed person would never say it), and
> none of the YECs I know consider us friendly to the YEC position (an
> accurate judgement). Since we do publish lots of articles in favor of ID,
> it's more likely that we'd be accused of being in league with TDI, but the
> fact is that lots of IDs *wish* we were in league with TDI when of course
> we
> are not. B/c many of our members find ID attractive, however, we have and
> should continue to publish well written and well argued essays that
> support
> aspects of ID as long as they respect the integrity of those who disagree
> with their conclusions.
>
> I was elected to Council this fall, after making a very clear statement
> about what I believe should be the ASA's attitude toward controversies of
> this nature. I can fairly assume that anyone who voted for me agrees with
> that attitude, or at least did not find it strongly objectionable. We had
> the election, Dick, and we did not decide to throw anyone out.
>
> Blessings,
>
> Ted
>
>
>
>
Received on Fri Dec 16 10:12:21 2005